NGTS-8b and NGTS-9b: two non-inflated hot-Jupiters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We report the discovery, by the Next Generation Transit Survey (NGTS), of two hot-Jupiters NGTS-8b and NGTS-9b. These orbit a $V\, =\, 13.68$ K0V star (Teff = 5241 ± 50 K) with a period of 2.49970 days, and a $V\, =\, 12.80$ F8V star (Teff = 6330 ± 130 K) in 4.43527 days, respectively. The transits were independently verified by follow-up photometric observations with the SAAO 1.0-m and Euler telescopes, and we report on the planetary parameters using HARPS, FEROS and CORALIE radial velocities. NGTS-8b has a mass, $0.93\, ^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ MJ and a radius, 1.09 ± 0.03 RJ similar to Jupiter, resulting in a density of $0.89\, ^{+0.08}_{-0.07}$ g cm−3. This is in contrast to NGTS-9b, which has a mass of 2.90 ± 0.17 MJ and a radius of 1.07 ± 0.06 RJ, resulting in a much greater density of $2.93^{+0.53}_{-0.49}$ g cm−3. Statistically, the planetary parameters put both objects in the regime where they would be expected to exhibit larger than predicted radii. However, we find that their radii are in agreement with predictions by theoretical non-inflated models.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".